On Thu, 2007-05-10 at 12:56 -0400, Dan Williams wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-05-09 at 14:46 -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> > Dan Williams wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2007-05-09 at 14:25 -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> > >> On Tue, 08 May 2007 21:27:00 -0400 Dan Williams wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> On Tue, 2007-05-08 at 20:
On Wed, 2007-05-09 at 17:41 -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> Dan Williams wrote:
> > I can fix those up; but setting KBUILD_VERBOSE=1 and recompiling doesn't
> > show any of them in current libertas-2.6; -Wall is definitely defined.
> > Is there another way to enable something give yet more verbose debu
On Wed, 2007-05-09 at 14:46 -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> Dan Williams wrote:
> > On Wed, 2007-05-09 at 14:25 -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> >> On Tue, 08 May 2007 21:27:00 -0400 Dan Williams wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Tue, 2007-05-08 at 20:41 -0300, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> On Tue, May 08, 2007 at 06:
Dan Williams wrote:
On Wed, 2007-05-09 at 14:25 -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote:
On Tue, 08 May 2007 21:27:00 -0400 Dan Williams wrote:
On Tue, 2007-05-08 at 20:41 -0300, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
On Tue, May 08, 2007 at 06:40:54PM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
Dan Williams wrote:
I'll audit the list of
Dan Williams wrote:
I can fix those up; but setting KBUILD_VERBOSE=1 and recompiling doesn't
show any of them in current libertas-2.6; -Wall is definitely defined.
Is there another way to enable something give yet more verbose debug
output?
The copious libertas warnings are present in vanilla
On Wed, 2007-05-09 at 14:25 -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> On Tue, 08 May 2007 21:27:00 -0400 Dan Williams wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 2007-05-08 at 20:41 -0300, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> > > On Tue, May 08, 2007 at 06:40:54PM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> > > > Dan Williams wrote:
> > > > >I'll audit the lis
On Tue, 08 May 2007 21:27:00 -0400 Dan Williams wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-05-08 at 20:41 -0300, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> > On Tue, May 08, 2007 at 06:40:54PM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> > > Dan Williams wrote:
> > > >I'll audit the list of ioctls and remove ones that may be objectionable,
> > > >and w
On Tue, 2007-05-08 at 20:41 -0300, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> On Tue, May 08, 2007 at 06:40:54PM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> > Dan Williams wrote:
> > >I'll audit the list of ioctls and remove ones that may be objectionable,
> > >and we'll go back through them after 2.6.22 and add back in ones that
>
On Tue, May 08, 2007 at 06:40:54PM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> Dan Williams wrote:
> >I'll audit the list of ioctls and remove ones that may be objectionable,
> >and we'll go back through them after 2.6.22 and add back in ones that
> >are actually required. Keep the API/ABI small and expand if nec
Jeff Garzik wrote:
Nick Piggin wrote:
Two things on top of a lot of people's pet peeves list are lack of
good review bandwidth, and poor driver code! So it is sad this was
merged without Christoph's comments being addressed. "it works for
me, we can fix it later" is probably a big reason for qu
Dan Williams wrote:
I'll audit the list of ioctls and remove ones that may be objectionable,
and we'll go back through them after 2.6.22 and add back in ones that
are actually required. Keep the API/ABI small and expand if necessary.
What's the timeframe required here? Linville said a few days
On Tue, 2007-05-08 at 16:55 -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> David Miller wrote:
> > From: "Pekka Enberg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> On 5/7/07, Jeff Garzik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>> Open source is about release early, release often. Not "hide code in a
> >>> dark corner until Christoph thinks it i
Nick Piggin wrote:
Two things on top of a lot of people's pet peeves list are lack of
good review bandwidth, and poor driver code! So it is sad this was
merged without Christoph's comments being addressed. "it works for
me, we can fix it later" is probably a big reason for quality
problems of som
David Miller wrote:
From: "Pekka Enberg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On 5/7/07, Jeff Garzik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Open source is about release early, release often. Not "hide code in a
dark corner until Christoph thinks it is perfect." We have high
standards for upstream merged code, but that st
From: "Pekka Enberg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 8 May 2007 12:47:34 +0300
> On 5/7/07, Jeff Garzik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Open source is about release early, release often. Not "hide code in a
> > dark corner until Christoph thinks it is perfect." We have high
> > standards for upstr
On 5/7/07, Jeff Garzik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Open source is about release early, release often. Not "hide code in a
dark corner until Christoph thinks it is perfect." We have high
standards for upstream merged code, but that standard is not perfection.
Please. This has nothing to do with
Matt Mackall wrote:
On Mon, May 07, 2007 at 11:22:34AM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
For my part, I _did_ review it. Twice. Once in the early days, and
once when I pulled it into my netdev-2.6.git tree. libertas needs the
changes mentioned in this thread. But the driver is in workable shape
On Mon, May 07, 2007 at 11:22:34AM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> John W. Linville wrote:
> >On Mon, May 07, 2007 at 08:03:43AM -0400, Dan Williams wrote:
> >>On Mon, 2007-05-07 at 11:41 +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> >
> >>>Of course it's not anywhere near good shape. Almost all items from my
> >
On Mon, May 07, 2007 at 11:48:46AM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> Dan Williams wrote:
> >So, either we push it off until 2.6.23, or it gets merged as-is and we
> >clean it up as we go along, which we'll certainly do.
>
> Um, it was merged a while ago.
>
> That's why John's email, and my own, are dis
On Mon, May 07, 2007 at 11:22:34AM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> Open source is about release early, release often. Not "hide code in a
> dark corner until Christoph thinks it is perfect." We have high
> standards for upstream merged code, but that standard is not perfection.
> Perfect is the
Dan Williams wrote:
So, either we push it off until 2.6.23, or it gets merged as-is and we
clean it up as we go along, which we'll certainly do.
Um, it was merged a while ago.
That's why John's email, and my own, are discussing the revert of the
driver, not the merge of the driver.
The exec
On Mon, 2007-05-07 at 11:22 -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> John W. Linville wrote:
> > On Mon, May 07, 2007 at 08:03:43AM -0400, Dan Williams wrote:
> >> On Mon, 2007-05-07 at 11:41 +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> >
> >>> Of course it's not anywhere near good shape. Almost all items from my
> >>>
John W. Linville wrote:
On Mon, May 07, 2007 at 08:03:43AM -0400, Dan Williams wrote:
On Mon, 2007-05-07 at 11:41 +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
Of course it's not anywhere near good shape. Almost all items from my
review were completely ignored, and we have another totoally substandard
wir
On Mon, May 07, 2007 at 08:03:43AM -0400, Dan Williams wrote:
> On Mon, 2007-05-07 at 11:41 +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > Of course it's not anywhere near good shape. Almost all items from my
> > review were completely ignored, and we have another totoally substandard
> > wireless driver wi
24 matches
Mail list logo
